3 ms·

If there is anyone from Amazon caring about freedom of speech and censorship — please contact me at s@samat.me, I'd love to give you more perspective on this.

by samat 7y ago

cle 7y ago
How about asking someone from Amazon to give you more perspective on this, too? You only seem interested in immediately accusing Amazon of not caring about freedom of speech and schooling them about it, without considering if there are legitimate technical reasons that might justify the tradeoff. I can think of many such reasons off the top of my head.
- sieabahlpark 7y ago
  Whatever gets the clicks amirite?
- ironmagma 7y ago
  With Amazon being the ones making the change, this situation is asymmetric. It’s on the affected to convince the “affectors,” if you will, that what they are doing is a bad idea. Whether they convince us or not is irrelevant.
- bartread 7y ago
  > I can think of many such reasons off the top of my head. What are they, please?
- stickfigure 7y ago
  The parent implied nothing about the merits of the change. He/she drew attention to one of the downsides, in a non-accusatory tone. I personally hadn't considered that aspect; maybe folks at Amazon didn't either. Whether or not it affects Amazon's decision, it's a constructive message, and you're mistaken to dismiss it.
hkai 7y ago
Hey Samat, I am pretty sure that AWS knows exactly what they're doing. They don't want to lose money by hosting objectionable content, and then lose customers to Aliyun or Russian cloud providers.
- adamfisk 7y ago
  Does Aliyun support path-based file storage? That could be handy!
  - hkai 7y ago
    Not sure but what I heard their API is the exact copy or the S3 API, so you can switch from one to other without any effort.
  - PhilippGille 7y ago
    I tested that when writing the S3 implementation of a Go key-value wrapper [1] and back then "Alibaba Cloud Object Storage Service (OSS)" did not support path-style addressing. If you're looking for a similarly robust and scalable alternative, Google Cloud Storage is accessible via S3 API when enabling that in the bucket's configuration and it supports path-style access (at least back when I tested the different S3-compatible services). [1] https://github.com/philippgille/gokv https://github.com/philippgille/gokv
- lightgreen 7y ago
  They did it not to make blocking in Russia and China easier, but to make their deployment cheaper and faster. Basically with v2 protocol your TCP packets go straight to the server where data is stored without going through one giant proxy. In another words, they do IP routing now instead of HTTP proxying.

If there is anyone from Amazon caring about freedom of speech and censorship — please contact me at s@samat.me, I'd love to give you more perspective on this.

by samat 7y ago

If there is anyone from Amazon caring about freedom of speech and censorship — please contact me at s@samat.me, I'd love to give you more perspective on this.

cle 7y ago

How about asking someone from Amazon to give you more perspective on this, too? You only seem interested in immediately accusing Amazon of not caring about freedom of speech and schooling them about it, without considering if there are legitimate technical reasons that might justify the tradeoff. I can think of many such reasons off the top of my head.

sieabahlpark 7y ago
Whatever gets the clicks amirite?
ironmagma 7y ago
With Amazon being the ones making the change, this situation is asymmetric. It’s on the affected to convince the “affectors,” if you will, that what they are doing is a bad idea. Whether they convince us or not is irrelevant.
bartread 7y ago
> I can think of many such reasons off the top of my head. What are they, please?
stickfigure 7y ago
The parent implied nothing about the merits of the change. He/she drew attention to one of the downsides, in a non-accusatory tone. I personally hadn't considered that aspect; maybe folks at Amazon didn't either. Whether or not it affects Amazon's decision, it's a constructive message, and you're mistaken to dismiss it.

hkai 7y ago

Hey Samat, I am pretty sure that AWS knows exactly what they're doing. They don't want to lose money by hosting objectionable content, and then lose customers to Aliyun or Russian cloud providers.

adamfisk 7y ago
Does Aliyun support path-based file storage? That could be handy!
- hkai 7y ago
  Not sure but what I heard their API is the exact copy or the S3 API, so you can switch from one to other without any effort.
- PhilippGille 7y ago
  I tested that when writing the S3 implementation of a Go key-value wrapper [1] and back then "Alibaba Cloud Object Storage Service (OSS)" did not support path-style addressing. If you're looking for a similarly robust and scalable alternative, Google Cloud Storage is accessible via S3 API when enabling that in the bucket's configuration and it supports path-style access (at least back when I tested the different S3-compatible services). [1] https://github.com/philippgille/gokv https://github.com/philippgille/gokv
lightgreen 7y ago
They did it not to make blocking in Russia and China easier, but to make their deployment cheaper and faster. Basically with v2 protocol your TCP packets go straight to the server where data is stored without going through one giant proxy. In another words, they do IP routing now instead of HTTP proxying.